MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4241810210 · doi:10.24124/2016/bpgub1127

Decomposition and carbon loss in lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) wood following attack by mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae)

2016· dissertation· en· W4241810210 on OpenAlexafffund
Benita Kaytor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsU.S. Forest ServiceUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsPinus contortaChronosequenceMountain pine beetleDendroctonusSnagEnvironmental scienceCoarse woody debrisDecompositionCarbon fibersPrecipitationCarbon cycleAtmospheric sciencesForestryEcologyBark beetleBotanyEcosystemSoil scienceBiologyGeographyBark (sound)GeologyMeteorologyMathematicsSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mountain pine beetle (MPB)-killed wood remaining on the landscape is predicted to release significant amounts of carbon to the atmosphere as it decays. A lack of field-based wood decomposition data for validating simulation models reduces certainty in such predictions. Using a chronosequence approach, I quantified decomposition of MPB-killed wood to improve decay rate parameters. Changes in carbon density over time and climatic variability showed distinct patterns for bole position categories. Snag carbon density was similar to that of live lodgepole pine, and did not change considerably with time or climatic influences. Decay in suspended boles increased with summer precipitation, but declined with increasing summer temperature, suggesting decay in elevated boles is moisture-limited on warmer sites. Down boles decayed four times faster with increasing proximity to the soil than suspended boles, but did not clearly reflect climatic influences. Position of dead boles appears more important for wood decay than previously thought. --Leaf ii.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies→French-language works237,207→